Someone is saying that Ron Paul loves earmarks

[qh4dotcom]

As a Ron Paul supporter it really hurt me to see this and I hope it's not true

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wOD_Di82zc

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/0706/popup.congress.earmarks/pdfs/tx.14.paul.pdf

Fortunately very few people have seen this video.

[werdd]

Basically, if the goverment steals from us, then your entitled to get the money back. It's called making the best of the system we got, even if the system blows.

[Mises]

Werdd is correct. Paul's position is that if the Congress is going to levy taxes and spend money in violation of the Constitution, at least he can recover a portion of it and return it to his district.

He always votes against the spending bills, however. While he would prefer that the spending not take place, once it does he attempts to recover some of the taxes for his district.

[qh4dotcom]

Thanks guys for helping me understand this.....wish me and all you guys could receive an earmark for all the money the government has stolen from us...I'm still trying to recover from the shock the video gave me...Wow...Ron Paul wants $8 million taxpayer dollars for Wild American Shrimp Marketing?
Another $2.3 million for research into shrimp fishing? Still sounds "fishy" to me. Did the government steal that much money $10.3 million from Wild American Shrimp Marketing?

[Kade]

Bump for serious bullshit.

Some of those requests are asinine... wtf.

CHILD database programs?! WTF?!

Most of these programs are jokes... this isn't going back to the people. It's going to crap. This is amazingly hypocritical. Why does he deserve the money if he didn't vote for it? He can't just sit back and take the high road, rejecting the money, and then turn around and spend it... Ridiculous. To even imply that it's the right thing to do... if he were this principled, he would do what it was he intended to do... NOT TAKE THE MONEY.

WTF!?!@

[Barney]

On the subject of "principle", one shouldn't be so quick to condemn a man who passes on his Congressional pension, returns a portion of his budget (~70k this year) to the US treasury, offers discounted and free medical care than bill Medicare/Medicaid and denies his children access to federal student loans.

From what little I've heard from Dr Paul on the subject is that removing earmarks does not reduce spending. If Congress does not designate the "earmarks", then it is the executive who ends up appropriating the unspent money. He cited that Congress removed the "bridge to nowhere" after the public uproar, but the executive approved the project anyways. And Dr Paul believes spending and appropriations belong in Congress not with the executive.